One of the crucial elements in a victim’s recovery from rape is social support. Many rape victims decompensate in response to negative reactions from others, even when these are combined with positive reactions. A wide body of literature has documented that negative reactions to rape victims are common, even among their family members, intimate partners and friends (Ahrens & Campbell, 2006; Kaukinen & DeMaris, 2009; Ullman, 2010). This is because those people may feel indirectly responsible for, and violated by, the rape. Because they may experience traumatic reactions of their own, they have been labeled “secondary survivors” or co-victims of the crimes. Secondary survivors may feel rage at the perpetrator, anger at the survivor, fear for their own safety, shame, grief or recollection of their own abuse; thus they may engage in ambivalent or negative reactions even with the best of intentions. These may include: attempts to silence the victim; attempts at distraction or interruption of the rape narrative; blaming, disbelief; placing emotional or physical distance between self and victim; threatening to track down and kill the offender; questioning the victim before they are prepared to talk about the crime; insinuations that sexual acts were consensual; attempts to prematurely resume sexual relations (in the case of a romantic partner) and attempts to seize control of aspects of the victims’ life (what they wear, where they live, where they go, who they associate with) in the name of “protection” (Banyard, et al., 2010; Smith, 2005; Ullman, 2010). Victim populations particularly vulnerable to the latter response are adolescents and people with disabilities – the two groups most likely to be raped according to existing statistics. A third to one-half of co-victims develop post traumatic stress disorder and require psychological counseling of their own; the biggest contributor to their adjustment is the amount of social support received from their communities (Christiansen, Bak & Elklit, 2012). While co-victims’ reactions are understandable, they can undermine the emotional stability of primary victims (Ullman, 2010). Sometimes co-victims also provide positive responses to disclosures such as believing victims, allowing them space to tell their stories, offering concrete aid, referring them for counseling, or telling them that they did not deserve to be assaulted. However, victims are often more affected by negative responses than positive ones. Negative responses can also be encountered in dealings with police officers, medical staff, counselors, shelter employees, and other representatives of “helping” professions (Schauben & Frazier, 2006). When victims internalize negative messages from others they may experience an increase in post traumatic stress that can result in negative coping strategies (Campbell, Dworkin & Cabral, 2009). However, helpful responses may decrease these. For example, in Kaukinen and DeMaris’ (2009) study, victims whose perpetrators were arrested, experienced a decrease in post traumatic binge drinking behaviors.

In many cultures, rape affects the honor of a victim’s family; stigma results from their failure to provide protection for their own. This understanding of rape may contribute to its use in war to humiliate enemy civilians (Brownmiller, 1975; Christiansen et al., 2012). Embarrassment, shame and attempts to hide a family member’s rape may result. Relatives of immigrant victims may fear deportation (Mason & Palvirenti, 2013; Pitts, 2014); relatives of gay or lesbian victims may fear public scrutiny of their family member’s sexuality (Balsam, Beauchaire & Rothblum, 2005). Adolescent and child victims, often lured into illegal activities by perpetrators, may fear punishment for their rule-breaking activities (Reid, 2010). Elderly victims or those with disabilities may fear placement in restrictive environments. Males may fear being characterized as gay (Balsam, et al., 2005). Thus, it can be seen that the incidence of rape, and the reluctance to report it, intersect with pre-existing social vulnerabilities.

According to sociologist Irving Goffman, stigma is a characterological “mark” that, once identified by others, results in social exclusion, hostility, pity and revulsion. Being a rape victim can be highly stigmatizing; this is amplified by membership in other stigmatized categories (such as persons with disabilities, AIDS sufferers, welfare recipients, prostitutes, etc.). For example, a minority-race lesbian may be especially reluctant to call public attention to her rape as it would add an additional layer of stigma. However, any rape reporter takes a considerable risk in coming forward, and may experience a multitude of negative social reactions.

Another psychological construct that may predispose people toward accepting rape myths is that of the Internal Locus of Control. This is the belief that choice and free will, rather than external influences beyond peoples’ control, are the causes of most events. Those with an external locus of control tend to view fate, accident, chance, God, or the behavior of others as responsible for what happens to them (Lerner & Miller, 1978). An external locus of control is common among trauma survivors, depressed people, people of lower socio-economic status, and certain cultural groups. Conversely, people with an internal locus of control (most often people of higher socio-economic status, males, and people from Western European or North American cultures) view their successes and failures largely in terms of their own efforts (Ajzen, 2002). Applied to rape cases, observers with an internal locus of control may tend to blame a victim’s actions, whereas those with an external locus of control are likely to blame the perpetrator, bad luck, the physical environment, indifferent bystanders, social mores, and other external causes. People with an internal locus of control that hear about a rape might reason “I wouldn’t have let that (rape) happen to me, so why did (s)he allow it to happen?”. In contrast, people with an external locus of control might react to the same rape victim by concluding: “There but for fortune go I.” (Hayes et al., 2013).

Rape has historically been defined very narrowly, with only forced penile-vaginal penetration counted as rape. Feminist legal advocacy resulted in various levels of rape, or sexual assault, being defined as criminal. More recent legal advocacy has resulted in marital rape, rape of gay and lesbian people and sexual relations with underaged, incapacitated or mentally disabled people to be classified as rape. However, despite evolving legal definitions (which vary across jurisdictions, states and nations) many people and institutions interpret rape according to their own standards (Edwards et al., 2011; Weis, 2012).

For political and economic reasons, colleges, residences for people with disabilities, drug rehabilitation facilities, prisons, juvenile detention facilities, branches of the military and religious orders may handle rapes “in house” rather than allow civilian law enforcement officials to intervene. There may be incentives to view rapes as rumors, misunderstandings or the atypical reactions of a person under stress – rather than as criminal acts. Even when police are called, they may accept institutional definitions of the events rather than pursing criminal justice remedies. This results in gross underestimations of rape rates within closed communities.

When studies of confidential or anonymous reports are compared with those made to police, it is clear that in many societies only 10–40% of victims make reports to formal criminal justice agents (Jordan, 2011; Kelly, 2005; Mossman et al., 2009; Morrison et al., 2007). For example, the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention has estimated that only 20% of actual rape incidents in Sweden are reported to the police (BRA, 2005) despite the gender equality espoused there. Westmarland and associates found that even in 2012 (after many reforms have been instituted to improve the police response to rape), 68% of women in their UK sample said they would not report a date, marital or acquaintance rape if it happened in the future. This speaks to a serious lack of confidence in the police force. The resulting low rape statistics provide communities with a false sense of safety.

Rape victims are more likely to report a rape if their friends encourage them to do so (Anders & Christopher, 2011; Paul, et al., 2013). Thus, the “reputation” of a police force is established through social networks that victims are part...